Cactus Game Design Message Boards

I'm about 51/49 in favor of this. It's a big change in the game, but potentially a good one. My fear is that, instead of increasing the variety seen in different decks (which I'm sure is part of the reason for this suggestion), there will remain five or six staple Dominants and maybe one or two wild cards. (Son of God, New Jerusalem, Angel of the Lord, Christian Martyr, and Grapes of Wrath are all staples). Depending on how some of these other up-in-the-air rule changes go (how Mayhem is dealt with and the subject of Doms rescuing in your territory), the variety might change slightly (Mayhem will remain a staple depending on the change, and Harvest Time will become a staple if SoG/NJ can only rescue from opponents).

No. No. NO. No rule should restrict deck building as much as this does. I still don't understand why no doms t1 isn't considered. Other ccgs have different rules for t1.

Wait so limiting the number of Doms is to restricting but cutting them from T1 entirely is okay?

Fail on my part, but you can see how that mistake could easily be made

I don't have strong feelings towards this, but I just hope this decision isn't rushed and 100+ games are playtested before a decision is made....

I fully support a rule change to allow Dominants in a players deck based on the length of their hair. The longer the hair the more Dominants they can have. The shorter the hair the less Dominants. What say ye?

Uh...  I'll get back to you after about a year of growth. 

I fully support a rule change to allow Dominants in a players deck based on the length of their hair. The longer the hair the more Dominants they can have. The shorter the hair the less Dominants. What say ye?

This would certainly get girls more involved.

Not getting a hair cut from now until this is decided

Hah, I haven't had a haircut for like 9 months. eZ'd

With your hair, Rawrlolsauce!, I'm not sure even a dominant cap would fit. heh.

Bryon, the poll thingy is broken. I am only able to vote in favor of this proposal once.  There should be some way to judge how fervently you hold your position.

Yay one more thing for disgruntled tournament hosts to check the deck for...
oh well, I'll get to that after explaining to registrant #1 which cherub/cheribim/seraphim/seraphim/seraph/seraph with live coal he needs to remove from his deck, lol.

iJoke, actually keeping it the same as lost souls would (all things considered) be pretty good damage control from the check-in process. "1,2,3,4,5,6,7 souls, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 dominants... that part's done."

 

No. No. NO. No rule should restrict deck building as much as this does.

You'd rather have 9-11 spots in your deck already dedicated to doms before you even make the deck, just to be able to attempt to compete? I'd say that's more restricting than having a limit. This is probably one of the best changes that could happen for the game, and I think it should have been done years ago. Woot!

instead of increasing the variety seen in different decks (which I'm sure is part of the reason for this suggestion), there will remain five or six staple Dominants and maybe one or two wild cards

6 staple doms is preferable to the current 10 staple doms in top decks.  That adds 4 more spots for variety

Ooooh, just a quick thought...  Is Doubt going to count against the cap?  Maybe Doubt should be the the Dominant equivalent of the Hopper for deck building purposes.

Good point.  Maybe Doubt and Glory of the Lord could count as -1 dominants, therefore allowing you to actually add another dominant to cancel them out.  Although even with that, I Doubt anyone would play GotL